Comment on Hollywood’s still relying on sequels at the box office

• KevonLooney@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Even the ones that don’t include Iron Man?

  These are loose definitions of “sequel”. This would mean that every story is a “sequel” to the Epic of Gilgamesh.

  source
• Emperor@feddit.uk ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Not according to the criteria in that graph.

  It would be more damning if they said “part of a franchise”.

  source

  • UKFilmNerd@feddit.uk ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I’d say the the Marvel franchise was one long interconnected story that ended with err Endgame. Everything after that feels pointless. 😁

    source

    • Emperor@feddit.uk ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Definitely searching for a point. I have enjoyed GotG3 and DS2, Shang-Chi had a lot of promise but blew it in the finale and while Thor: Love and Thunder was flawed it was still good fun.

      As I’ve said before - they need to get back to making good movies with stories people want to tell and do the franchise building as an extra. Following Endgame they seemed to reverse that and franchise building became the most important thing. Luckily, it looks like.James Gunn knows this and isn’t going to make the same mistake at DC (although the number of characters popping up in Superman has me a bit worried).

      source
  • maegul@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    It would be more damning if they said “part of a franchise”.

    For sure, but part of what the MCU “unlocked” was a non-linear franchise, where it’s not just sequels or prequels but an arbitrary network of films that connect in some way or another. Thus all of the MCU films.

    The thing though, I suspect, is that a sense of linearity in the overall story was actually pivotal to the Ironman-Endgame era of the MCU. There was always a sense of the whole thing pushing in a single general direction. And post Endgame, that sense disappeared and Marvel frankly kinda shat the bed on recreating it in some way.

    So given that, and the way IronMan/RDJ was the single linear thread through the whole thing, along with the rest of the “the band”, I think it makes a lot of sense to treat that sprawl of films as a giant series of sequels.

    source
  • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Those criteria are not indicative of a sequel. For example, Star Wars Episode IV would be considered a sequel by this metric. As would Indiana Jones: The Last Crusade. Meanwhile the first Avengers movie is, if nothing else, a sequel to Thor, Captain America, and Iron Man. Yet it doesn’t count by these criteria.

    source
• ThePantser@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  That’s a lot of sequels.

  source